The following is the first case in a series where we examine several of Richard Peck’s cases where he acted on behalf of the government as a special prosecutor. The analysis will demonstrate at the very least a perception that Peck may have a pro-accused viewpoint that may lead to a propensity to withdraw charges in cases involving police or government officials. Peck’s pro-accused bias created a perception that he was not independent when he acted as special prosecutor in case against former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant.

On August 17, 1994 eight year old Mindy Tran disappeared near her home in Rutland, BC. Her body was discovered on October 11, 1994. The prime suspect in her murder was a neighbour, Shannon Murrin. He would be arrested, tried and acquitted of her murder.

The report noted that the lead investigator, RCMP Sergeant Gary Tidsbury, should have been replaced. “The downfall of this case was the integrity of the investigation.” “There were a few whose bad judgment, loss of objectivity and a failure to live up to one’s duty as a member of the RCMP contributed to the downfall of this file.”

Murrin’s defence attorney’s argued that Tidsbury investigated with tunnel vision and decided very early that Murrin was guilty.

After the trial and acquittal of Jian Ghomeshi much has been written and spoken regarding his lawyer Marie Henein and her work with another famous client, former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant. In both cases the media attributed Henein’s success to her ability to find exculpatory evidence supporting her clients. The question that has not been addressed is why did Ghomeshi’s case go to trial but not Bryant’s? Why did Henein reveal her entire defence to the Crown in Bryant’s case, in order to avoid a trial but not in Ghomeshi’s case?

The simple answer would be that Henein felt the evidence, against Jian Ghomeshi (including the exculpatory evidence she had uncovered) was stronger than the evidence against Michael Bryant. The Crown in Ghomeshi’s case went to trial because they believed they had a reasonable prospect of conviction. The Crown in Bryant’s case, represented by special prosecutor Richard Peck and his Ontario agent Mark Sandler determined that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.

Both defendants had the same lawyer, so let’s compare the strength of the evidence in each case.

On August 31, 2009, former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant was involved in a road rage attack that killed cyclist Darcy Allan Sheppard. Bryant was arrested that evening but he did not make a statement to police. He would not make a statement until almost eight months later when he and his lawyers received complete and full disclosure of the Crown’s case. Bryant did however make a 911 call to police. After he successfully knocked Darcy Allan Sheppard off his car with a fire hydrant, Bryant fled to the Hyatt Hotel on Avenue Road just north of Bloor. It became the staging area for his defence.

Bryant described his actions in his book, “28 Seconds”

“So I turned right on Avenue Road and drove into the hotel’s circular driveway and found, I thought, sanctuary. I stopped the car and pulled up the emergency brake-for what would be the final time. I couldn’t find my cell phone. Susan offered hers.”

In a video interview with the Toronto Star, he said: “And so I pulled over and called 911. It was… police need to come and protect us.”

In his CBC interview with Amanda Lang he said: “So I drove in and called 911 and ah said, help, bring police..”

His lawyer, Marie Henein wrote in her article, “Split Seconds Matter,” “He drove to safety just around the corner to a hotel and called 911.”

What’s missing from all of these descriptions is that when Michael Bryant drove to the Hyatt Hotel, in what he described as a state of fear, he did not call 911 right away. He waited three minutes!

Michael Bryant’s memoir about the night he killed Darcy Allan Sheppard is to be released tomorrow. The book is entitled “28 Seconds” and gives his self-serving account of the events that evening.

Bryant has been on a media tour of soft-ball interviews allowing him to promote the book while avoiding questions regarding the parts of his version that directly conflict with the evidence and or prior statements contained in court transcripts. Bryant revealed that he was an alcoholic until 2006. It’s not known if and when he had any relapses because no one in the media had asked him the question.

One of the new charges Bryant raised is police rushed to judgment when they charged him in Sheppard’s death.

“He is wrong,” police spokesman Mark Pugash protested.

“He had a team of very aggressive, very good lawyers whose job it is to jump on anything that will help their client, and we haven’t heard anything about this (until now),” Pugash said. “If he had all these concerns, why has he been quiet for the last three years? Why have his lawyers not raised a single one of these concerns?”

In fact in the court transcripts Bryant’s lawyer Marie Henein praised the treatment Bryant received from police:

“I want to take a moment to also express our thanks to Detective Britton, Detective Lane, Detective Lalla, for a thorough and evenhanded investigation.

I was confident throughout this case that we would be treated the same as, not better and not worse, than any other accused, that Mr. Peck would do no more and no less than is demanded in the prosecution of any case.”

For those who might be unfamiliar with What’s All This Then?! – it’s typically a podcast about unusual Toronto musicians. Interviews, reviews, etc. This episode is an exception: it’s an examination of what actually happened between ex-attorney general Michael Bryant and bike courier Al Sheppard which resulted in Sheppard’s death.

That said, as the special prosecutor detailed his reasons for dropping the charges, it was hard to feel like justice was being served, or that we’re all still somehow equal in the eyes of the law.

I don’t know why a “special prosecutor” had to be brought in to handle the case, although it makes sense that you can’t have a local Crown prosecuting his former boss without somebody questioning the possibility of impropriety. But when this special prosecutor detailed his reasons for dropping charges, I couldn’t help feeling a greater impropriety was taking place with somebody in charge who would never need to face much local scrutiny or accountability.

Instead of making sure Michael Bryant didn’t get preferential treatment, what was revealed yesterday suggested that’s exactly what he received.

Prosecutors and Bryant’s legal team seemed to share an inordinate amount of information and a lot of time and money was spent investigating the character of the deceased while hard forensic evidence (or the fact it had never been collected) seemed of lesser importance. It was as if both sides were trying the case in private, searching for a path to make it all go away.

What message does it send out that Michael Bryant faces no charges after his car crushed Darcy Allan Sheppard to death?

The video of the initial encounter is clear: a cyclist pulls up in front of a stationary car at red traffic light, and stops; after a few moments, the car jerks forward, reverses and then drives straight into the cyclist, knocking him off his bike and onto the bonnet and off again. The car stops briefly, and then drives around the cyclist to carry on down the road. As the car passes, the cyclist grabs hold of the car. Exactly what happens next is not as obvious, as there is no video, but at least this much is not disputed: the car moves over into the oncoming carriageway, hits some street furniture on the sidewalk, denting its side-panels, and at some point, the cyclist loses his grip on the car and falls dead in the roadway.

The driver later hands himself over the police and, in due course, is charged with “criminal negligence causing death and dangerous driving causing death”. Last week, the legal proceedings reached their conclusion. The charges against the driver were dropped by the special prosecutor appointed by the province of Ontario to investigate the case, who said that the prosecution had determined that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.

An obvious miscarriage of justice, you might say, but an outcome that was feared by the Toronto messenger community once the identity of the driver became known. Michael Bryant is a former attorney general of Ontario, and Darcy Allan Sheppard was a bicycle messenger. The incident became a major media event, not least because Bryant engaged a well-known Canadian PR company very shortly after Sheppard’s death.

BY ALLAN SHEPPARD JANUARY 17, 2018 FROM NOW MAGAZINE What was the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) thinking when it chose Michael Bryant as its new executive director and general counsel? There was no formal statement issued by CCLA on the appointment, only a tweet January 11 stating that the organization is “thrilled” to have […]

IMBALANCE IN THE COURT ROOM (PART 3) The following is the first case in a series where we examine several of Richard Peck’s cases where he acted on behalf of the government as a special prosecutor. The analysis will demonstrate at the very least a perception that Peck may have a pro-accused viewpoint that may […]

IMBALANCE IN THE COURT ROOM (PART 2) After police charged former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death in relation to the death of cyclist Darcy Allan Sheppard, the Ministry of the Attorney General appointed BC criminal defence lawyer, and perennial independent […]

Michael Bryant’s killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard All of the tweets from this twitter essay are in this thread from the first tweet How Michael Bryant killed Darcy Allan Sheppard & the justice system was manipulated to set him free in less than 130 tweets #biketo #topoli — Mess Media (@MessengerMedia) September 29, 2016 […]

CALL FOR EXPERT ANALYSIS REPORTS TO BE RELEASED When special prosecutor Richard Peck withdrew all charges against former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant resulting from Bryant’s killing of Darcy Allan Sheppard, he failed to warn the court and the public about the credibility and bias of the prime video expert in the case. Peck based […]

“Two-tier justice means that those who can afford a legal dream team can buy their way out of jail” – Michael Bryant After police charged former Attorney General Michael Bryant with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death in relation to the death of cyclist Darcy Allan […]

On this date six years ago Special Prosecutor and experienced defence attorney, Richard Peck withdrew charges against former Attorney General Michael Bryant in the death of Darcy Allan Sheppard. Bryant was charged with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death. Bryant’s actions were captured on surveillance vi […]

After the trial and acquittal of Jian Ghomeshi much has been written and spoken regarding his lawyer Marie Henein and her work with another famous client, former Ontario Attorney General, Michael Bryant. In both cases the media attributed Henein’s success to her ability to find exculpatory evidence supporting her clients. The question that has not been add […]

III Reasonable doubt? Or unreasonable certainty? As usual for me, this post is long—extra-long in this case because I have included extensive notes with almost twice as many words as the main tex… Source: Witness against the prosecution—Part III

Originally posted on 28 Questions: II – Enlightened justice at the end of the tunnel? Or darkness? In recalling the advice of Lord Mansfield (See Part I) Prof. Sen does not argue against giving reasons for official decisions; his book is an extended argument for full disclosure in the public interest and in the cause of justice. He…